tv [untitled] CSPAN July 1, 2009 3:00pm-3:30pm EDT
their. we are finding that voters would be happy to have business pay for this, to have the rich pay for it. if you get past that, they are much less willing to spend their money for a health-care overhaul, it appears. >> was there any question that dealt with media influence in comparisons with what was happening in the 1990's? >> no, there is not. . none. anything else? anything else? thank you.
>> what is the sense of the situation in honduras at this point? >> i think it is best for me to characterize what actions have happened here. tom shannon and others met here yesterday with the president of honduras. you have seen oas take actions at set -- and set deadlines for the restoration of the president before actions taken in, and that is where we are. >> how far reaching our the
pentagon's suspending military actions? >> we continue to monitor the situation and will respond accordingly as events transpire. as i said, we are watching closely what is going on. >> another meltdown, and tell for it. the legislature failed to agree on a budget plan, and they on the verge of having to take the extraordinary step of issuing i owe you's. how concerned is the administration about this development, and what would the federal government to do to help them out of it? >> the biggest step the federal government can do, we have done as it related to the recovery plan. $144 billion is the amount of money to recover late plan for states. -- is the recovery plan for
states. how it affects each state budget -- as you mentioned, there are a number of states that find themselves at the end of the fiscal year and are required to pass budgets. we're watching -- in california's instance, they had sought weeks ago a designation under tarp, which the secretary of the treasury said, based on all, was not possible. the major contribution from the federal government has been an increase in medicaid and education money to go to helping to close some of the fiscal gaps. >> but that is only a drop in the bucket. the stimulus plan has not given them enough to make ends meet. >> i forget the exact number of
budgetary shortfall, but i understand the $144 billion represents a large chunk of the state budget shortfalls for the state. it is not a whole thing, it is an important step that we took, understanding and economic recovery had to include individual state governments, and we have taken important steps to cushion as much as possible that blow. >> does it concern that the largest state that the block -- that they are about to issue iou's? >> we continue to watch the situation and will see how it develops. >> we know you don't like polls.
any negative poles apart typically dismissed. in the new cnn poll -- we like this and think they are credible. it shows there is resistance among the public for the president's plan. they believe there health care costs will go up. only a majority, 51%, approved a plan. is there concern that there is resistance? >> again, you might have listed a different answer if the poll was different. >> there's the question of concern that the costs will go up. >> that is why we have to do the job of telling people what will happen if we change the rate of
spending on health care, that if we see greater the efficiency, seek treatments, not simply -- when we approach health care we seek to treat them not to provide them more and more treatments. that is one of the things the president has talked about. changing the way we spend money on health care is extremely important. that is something the president has dedicated a lot of time to doing. millions of americans are paying a premium every day for the means of people who do not have health insurance, but have to seek medical treatment in an emergency. there are tons of hidden costs in our health-care system that have to be addressed through comprehensive health care reform. mr. day, -- yesterday, there were important developments relating to this.
the mission cost largest employer, walmart, is supportive of aspects of our plan because they understand as a business they are seeing the crushing effects of skyrocketing health- care costs, just as families and state governments are, just as the federal government is. the president you will see today continue to describe for the american people positive aspects of health care reform and the reason why doing nothing just is not an option. >> his id and edition of the president having to better explain himself? -- is its an issue of the president having to better explain himself? >> one of the reasons he is out there today is to give people a
better understanding of what his plan will do, how it will impact them, what it will do to change the cost for their family or for their small business. all of those lc to do, has done, and will do the today in virginia. >> does he have to change anything at all? he has been talking about holding a town hall meetings. does anything have to change to wrap it up to explain better, if at this juncture, there is still some confusion, perhaps? >> my sense is a lot of this is frequency and that is why you see us frequently do more events on health care. >> what did rot america -- rahm emmanual say? >> i think he would appreciate
that he might have twisted or broken an arm, but that is not the case. this is something that the nation's largest employer, as well as the nation's largest union -- they both understand that they are watching skyrocketing health-care costs. i wish i would have brought it out, a great " on "the wall street journal by the head of the retail system who said that wal-mart -- he said he was surprised that walmart had abandoned their previous position on an employer mandate for the promise of health care savings. the ridiculous notion that a business would make a business decision, but a business that is suffering the crushing cost of health care increased year after year might eventually come to the conclusion that the status
quo was unacceptable. that is what the president has come to. i think a lot of the american people have come to that conclusion. that is why congress is making significant progress on health care reform. >> walmart said the commitment to rein in costs must be the strongest possible and endorsed the idea of a trigger mechanism that would automatically and force reductions in medical expenditures. what is the white house's position on that consequences of a trigger in this legislation? >> i do not know if what that is talking about are some of the medpac recommendations that the white house it has also endorsed. you have heard peter and others talk about the notion to set up as a written result the balanced budget agreement of
1997, a board that considers options to rein in unnecessarily large health-care costs from the government. each and every year, these recommendations are gathered and moved aside. obviously, the president and his team believed that -- believe that this is a key component of health care reform. >> you mentions the baker- daschle-dole approach. >> to underscore -- you have for the president say -- this is not a bill for a bill's sake. this has to be something that is
meaningful. that -- one of the meaningful aspects of any of this legislation has to be something that rains in the cost of health care. if all we do is take what is happening now with those skyrocketing costs and simply add to that, you are creating a system that cannot sustain itself. obviously we have to change the arc of health care spending. >> what about the smaller businesses? what does a mandate look like and what level could they be able to opt out? >> there will have to be discussions about this. this is -- this is not something that is going to be -- there are going to be exemptions for business size in this.
there's no doubt about that. >> what size? >> i will leave that to the negotiators rather than pick a number here. what is important is -- this represents a pretty big mind-set change on behalf of the nation's largest employer. it is a recognition first and foremost of the the notion -- of the notion that health care costs are increasing at a rate that cannot be sustained even by the largest employer. you can imagine the crushing impact it has on people that are not seeing gross revenues like they are. >> those same people say it will crush them even more. the smallest businesses, having some kind of a mandate like that. >> that is what the smallest business is not going to fall under that scenario. there is obviously going to be
some carved out as it relates to that. >> sarah palin in an interview said that in a one-on-one with the president she would win. >> that is an interesting question. how is her jump shot? i guess it depends on whether they were going to run. maybe there is a train advantage in a place like alaska. i will ask him if he has got any free time for that. >> the question coming in on youtube, who decides what questions will be asked? >> a group over at new media is shuffling over the questions. you will see some of those questions. at the end of the day, the questions that will be read the
president -- and he will take questions from the audience -- they will be representative samples of the issues in this debate that we're dealing with. >> the audience is always preselected put >> we hand out tickets on a first-come first- served basis. >> of these tickets are were handed out by the university. it is tightly controlled. the concept of a town hall is to have an open public forum. this sounds like a tightly controlled audience and list of questions. why do it that way? >> you can ask me that question tomorrow based on what questions were asked rather than preselecting your question based on something that may or may not come forward. >> why not just open it up to people? >> if you get on your computer
have you send in your question? >> that is inappropriate. this is a forum for the public. >> are you not a member of the public? >> i am well out of shopping range. >> you could e-mail. >> would you put my question in there? i do not think so. >> how you know? >> this is an open forum for the public ask questions, but it is not open. >> based on what? >> based on what course that gave us. >> the questions are being based on email and questions. >> it is tightly controlled. just like town meetings all to the campaign. >> i appreciate questions on your part.
i think that is a safe bet. how about we do this. i promise we will interrupt the ap's the addition of asking the first question, i will let you ask a question tomorrow whether the questions that were allowed to be asked at the town hall meeting in annandale -- >> we have never had that in this white house. >> i will let you amend that question. >> i amend -- i am amazed that you people who have called for openness and transparency -- >> it does not matter. it is the process. even if there is a tough question it is a question that is coming from someone who was invited or a question that was screened. >> that's had this " -- let's
have this discussion at the end of the town hall meeting. >> let's have it now. it is about controlling the press. >> is there any evidence going on now the i am controlling the press? poorly, i might add. >> the night before, telling them they are going to be called on. >> we have had this discussion ad nauseam. >> of course you would because you do not have any answers. >> because i did not know you were going to answer -- asked the question. >> @ emailed your question today? >> i can tell you right now what my question is. >> i do not doubt that at all right now, helen. >> if you get it on your
computer you can ask that yourself. i was told you guys have a pretty good one. >> adp released their estimates for what the job loss figures are. we know we are going to get the public number tamara. worse than expected. wall street concluded, the stock market conclude its first positive quarter. we have heard that unemployment is a 8 lagging indicator. wall street recovering, mainstream not. there is this. what do you say? >> we have had this discussion more than any other. i have long said the spike questions that i do not -- that despite your questions i do not
equate anything going on with the ups and downs of the stock market. >> it goes to this concern that some have it, that you have done a lot to help wall street and it has not trickled down. >> you can go back to any number of your questions about is gone on as it related to the recovery and what was going on in wall street. i was not making that connection. many of you were. i will leave that largely outside. -- aside. this is not going to happen overnight. this is not something that we got into recently. this is a recession that statistically dates back to
december of 2007, and if you look at the job loss figures, specifically, in the last six months, you see a real change in the number of figures, a real shot in the size of those figures. >> but not moving in the way you thought it was going to. >> we have said this was going to take time. i said last week that i think either this month or next month we will hit 10%. if you go back and look at economic forecasts around november, december, and january you will find a lot of people that were surprised that what we ultimately learned then, which was the level of growth -- i forget the numbers -- we were contracting at less than 1%, and
then the ultimate revised figure for the last quarter in 2008 was -.58%. >> i am understand the statistics. >> i think the public rightly, as the president will be, is rightly anxious until we see job creation, not job loss, positive economic growth, not negative economic growth, and i think that is going to take some time. not simply because it is a lagging indicator, but i think for the economy to turn around from the debt that it has been in is not going to happen over the course of one or two months, but the course of many, many moons.
>> 60 senate votes. your party has them. everything is on the democrats, and we -- everything is on this white house. if you fail to get something it is because you do not have unanimity in your party. is that fair? >> it is a little odd -- >> michael steele said it. this is a republican st. -- >> was he not complaint last week about bipartisanship? >> you have the 60 seats. you have the white house. it is your party's hands. >> there is no doubt. i do not know that the seating of one senator changes the notion that democrats control both houses of congress and the white house.
i hope the implication by michael steele is not that addressing america's problems is not a priority of all americans serving in government, not simply one party. you can ask him that as a fault. this president is going to pursue the policies that he believes are important to turn our economy down, to change our image throughout the world, and continued to reach out to democrats and republicans to make that agenda happened. >> i have heard from plenty of -- 60 seats. if you do not have 60 votes, you did not have it. your party has 60 seats. you do not have that excuse any
more. >> again, there is math. i will see this as i have said many times. -- i will say this. we do not everybody from every party on every. -- on every vote. we will continue to make progress. all this, a democrat or republican, had the unique responsibility of serving in government in times like this to work as much as we can together to address and solve these problems. i do not think one party can simply say it is all yours. that does not seem to be the message. in prior weeks, about making sure that are part of that solution. that is the outreach the
president will continue to do it to continue to restore our economic growth. >> are you seeing you do not see 60 votes as a rubber stamp in the senate? >> there are 60 senators who would say that this. >> as the president change his mind about sending troops to afghanistan? > yesterday on iraqi said forces that come out of iraq could be used in afghanistan, and yet general jones is making it sound like your emphasis will be on economic development in afghanistan rather than military victory. >> there are several hundred years of evidence that military might alone is not likely to solve all of your problems in that country or that region of
the world. i understand that the troop increase is the president ordered are in the process of phasing in. not all of that has been done. the president was concerned about the situation in afghanistan, as were commanders on the ground, and an additional troops had been approved in order to stabilize the security situation as we head into the elections. the important thing the general was making on his trip was in order to stabilize the country, to get it back on track, and solve some of the long-term problems, you will have to have more than just military might. you will have to have more than military power. the onus will have to be on the afghans to improve their security situation, which is why portion of the additional troop
increases go for training the afghan police and military, which is tremendously important. if we do not get good governance, improvement in government, if we do not get an increase in development and a change in the economy, i think the president and general terms would agree that no amount of troops are going to leave that country in a situation that is sustainable. let me finish. that is the point, much as the point i made yesterday on a couple questions as it related to iraq. it is pretty clear that an increase -- or a decrease in the amount of violence and in some ways an increase in troops to change the security environment